Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments

Miguel B. Araujo; Robert P. Anderson; A. Marcia Barbosa; Colin Michael Beale; Carsten F. Dormann; Regan Isabella Early; Raquel Garcia; Antoine Guisan; Luigi Maiorano; Babak Naimi; Robert B. O'Hara; Niklaus E. Zimmermann; Carsten Rahbek

doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat4858

Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments

Miguel B. Araujo, Robert P. Anderson, A. Marcia Barbosa, Colin Michael Beale, Carsten F. Dormann, Regan Isabella Early, Raquel Garcia, Antoine Guisan, Luigi Maiorano, Babak Naimi, Robert B. O'Hara, Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Carsten Rahbek

Biology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Demand for models in biodiversity assessments is rising, but which models are adequate for the task? We propose a set of best-practice standards and detailed guidelines enabling scoring of studies based on species distribution models for use in biodiversity assessments. We reviewed and scored 400 modeling studies over the past 20 years using the proposed standards and guidelines. We detected low model adequacy overall, but with a marked tendency of improvement over time in model building and, to a lesser degree, in biological data and model evaluation. We argue that implementation of agreed-upon standards for models in biodiversity assessments would promote transparency and repeatability, eventually leading to higher quality of the models and the inferences used in assessments. We encourage broad community participation toward the expansion and ongoing development of the proposed standards and guidelines.

Original language	English
Article number	eaat4858
Number of pages	11
Journal	Science Advances
Volume	5
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat4858
Publication status	Published - 16 Jan 2019

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

10.1126/sciadv.aat4858

eaat4858.full
© 2019 The Authors
Final published version, 838 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

@article{12e87af292f14ffe92433822cb549d1b,

title = "Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments",

abstract = "Demand for models in biodiversity assessments is rising, but which models are adequate for the task? We propose a set of best-practice standards and detailed guidelines enabling scoring of studies based on species distribution models for use in biodiversity assessments. We reviewed and scored 400 modeling studies over the past 20 years using the proposed standards and guidelines. We detected low model adequacy overall, but with a marked tendency of improvement over time in model building and, to a lesser degree, in biological data and model evaluation. We argue that implementation of agreed-upon standards for models in biodiversity assessments would promote transparency and repeatability, eventually leading to higher quality of the models and the inferences used in assessments. We encourage broad community participation toward the expansion and ongoing development of the proposed standards and guidelines.",

author = "Araujo, {Miguel B.} and Anderson, {Robert P.} and Barbosa, {A. Marcia} and Beale, {Colin Michael} and Dormann, {Carsten F.} and Early, {Regan Isabella} and Raquel Garcia and Antoine Guisan and Luigi Maiorano and Babak Naimi and O'Hara, {Robert B.} and Zimmermann, {Niklaus E.} and Carsten Rahbek",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2019 The Authors",

year = "2019",

month = jan,

day = "16",

doi = "10.1126/sciadv.aat4858",

language = "English",

volume = "5",

journal = "Science Advances",

issn = "2375-2548",

publisher = "American Association for the Advancement of Science",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments

AU - Araujo, Miguel B.

AU - Anderson, Robert P.

AU - Barbosa, A. Marcia

AU - Beale, Colin Michael

AU - Dormann, Carsten F.

AU - Early, Regan Isabella

AU - Garcia, Raquel

AU - Guisan, Antoine

AU - Maiorano, Luigi

AU - Naimi, Babak

AU - O'Hara, Robert B.

AU - Zimmermann, Niklaus E.

AU - Rahbek, Carsten

PY - 2019/1/16

Y1 - 2019/1/16

N2 - Demand for models in biodiversity assessments is rising, but which models are adequate for the task? We propose a set of best-practice standards and detailed guidelines enabling scoring of studies based on species distribution models for use in biodiversity assessments. We reviewed and scored 400 modeling studies over the past 20 years using the proposed standards and guidelines. We detected low model adequacy overall, but with a marked tendency of improvement over time in model building and, to a lesser degree, in biological data and model evaluation. We argue that implementation of agreed-upon standards for models in biodiversity assessments would promote transparency and repeatability, eventually leading to higher quality of the models and the inferences used in assessments. We encourage broad community participation toward the expansion and ongoing development of the proposed standards and guidelines.

AB - Demand for models in biodiversity assessments is rising, but which models are adequate for the task? We propose a set of best-practice standards and detailed guidelines enabling scoring of studies based on species distribution models for use in biodiversity assessments. We reviewed and scored 400 modeling studies over the past 20 years using the proposed standards and guidelines. We detected low model adequacy overall, but with a marked tendency of improvement over time in model building and, to a lesser degree, in biological data and model evaluation. We argue that implementation of agreed-upon standards for models in biodiversity assessments would promote transparency and repeatability, eventually leading to higher quality of the models and the inferences used in assessments. We encourage broad community participation toward the expansion and ongoing development of the proposed standards and guidelines.

U2 - 10.1126/sciadv.aat4858

DO - 10.1126/sciadv.aat4858

M3 - Article

SN - 2375-2548

VL - 5

JO - Science Advances

JF - Science Advances

IS - 1

M1 - eaat4858

ER -